Cubbage v. Gray

Decision Date27 January 1967
PartiesAllen P. CUBBAGE, Executor of a Paper, etc., of John W. Clark et al., Appellants, v. Panzy GRAY et al., Appellees.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Richard E. Moorman, Cubbage & Cubbage, Leitchfield, for appellants.

Kenneth Goff, Leitchfield, Rhodes Bratcher, Owensboro, for appellees.

CULLEN, Commissioner.

Probate of the will of John W. Clark was contested on the grounds of undue influence and lack of mental capacity. The jury found against the will and judgment was entered setting aside the county court order of probate. The contestees have appealed, asserting as their major contention that a verdict should have been directed in favor of the will.

Clark, an 82-year-old widower, owned a small farm and had a few thousand dollars in cash and securities. His next of kin were a daughter and two children of a deceased son, who were the contestants below and are the appellees here. By his will Clark left a one-sixth share of his estate to the daughter and a one-twelfth share to each of the two grandchildren. The remainder he left in designated shares to various nephews and nieces.

We think there was ample evidence to take the case to the jury. The lay evidence for the contestants would warrant findings that Clark:

1. Had an insane delusion that his daughter's husband was threatening to kill him, and had stolen lumber from him.

2. Without justification had accused his son of stealing papers from him and his tenant of stealing feed.

3. Erroneously thought his fellow inmates in a rest home were stealing his clothing.

4. Thought he was 'rich'.

5. On one occasion did not know the name or location of his bank.

6. Started giving his money away to his nephews, who had never been particularly close to him.

7. Spent considerable time and effort digging a hole or tunnel into a rocky hillside on his farm, in the belief that he would find gold or would discover a cave as large and as beautiful as Mammoth Cave.

8. Carried on conversations with sticks which he picked up at random; believed that the sticks answered his questions; and relied upon such answers in making decisions.

9. Had an unfounded belief that someone was stealing money from his bank account.

In addition to the lay testimony there was the testimony of the doctor who attended Clark during his declining years. The doctor testified that Clark was suffering from senile psychosis; that his mind had started deteriorating in 1959 (four years before the will was executed) and that the deterioration continued and progressed thereafter;...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT